Minarovic v Unique Living Australia Pty Ltd (in liq)

The dispute in Minarovic v Unique Living Australia Pty Ltd (in liq) involved the assessment of costs between the plaintiff, Minarovic, and the defendant, Unique Living Australia, a company in liquidation. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, which had jurisdiction to review a determination by a costs review panel. The plaintiff contested the costs agreement between the parties, arguing that the review panel had erred in setting aside the costs agreement and determining the costs to be paid.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the review panel had erred in law by failing to provide adequate reasons for its decision and whether it had correctly interpreted the procedural documents in the case. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the reference to an ‘amended statement of claim’ instead of an ‘amended summons’ was significant and whether the review panel had overlooked additional submissions made by the parties. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the review panel had correctly assessed the fair and reasonable costs incurred by the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court found that the review panel had indeed erred in law by not adequately explaining its reasons for setting aside the costs agreement. The court held that the reference to an ‘amended statement of claim’ instead of an ‘amended summons’ did not impact the outcome of the case. Additionally, the court found that the review panel had failed to consider all relevant submissions and had not correctly assessed the fair and reasonable costs. The appeal panel had also erred by not taking into account the additional submissions made during the assessment. Ultimately, the court held that the review panel's determination of fair and reasonable costs was incorrect.

The Supreme Court set aside the review panel's determination and remitted the matter back to the costs review panel for reconsideration in light of the court's findings. The court emphasised the importance of providing clear and adequate reasons for decisions and ensuring that all relevant submissions are considered in the assessment of costs.